6
Georgia Study of Reoccurrence Rates – Rigorous method to control for differences, found factors most correlated with a return to homelessness 1. Was not in a Rapid Re-Housing program 2. Had a history of homelessness 3. Went to a “temporary” destination 4. Was Non-Hispanic / Non-Latino 5. Was Non-White 6. Had a disabling condition at program exit 7. Program was in a non-rural county 8. Was male 9. Was unaccompanied 10. Was not with a teenage male Source : Jason Rodriguez, GA Dept of Community Affairs Research question: Which client, program, geographical characteristics exert greatest influence on the likelihood that someone returns to homelessness? Results: 9000 enrollments, 28% return to homelessness. Return Risk Factors: Key Finding: Exits from Shelter 4.7 times; Tran. Housing 4.0 times more likely to return to homelessness than exits from Rapid Re-Housing

7
Research Aims for Rapid Re-Housing Can we answer the counterfactual? RESEARCH AIM for RRH Policy: Research for RRH policy goal is to estimate whether RRH is the specific element responsible for decreasing homelessness. Counterfactual: What would have happened to RRH households if there was no RRH? WHY RESEARCH DESIGN IS NECESSARY: When households who participate in RRH are different from households who do not, need to control for differences using research design. Differences in RRH and non-RRH households show up as confounders: i.e. RRH enrollment strategies differences by case manager, by program; length of RRH assistance; Housing market variability Gold Standard = Random Control Trial = assess causal effect of RRH RESEARCH DESIGN WITHOUT RCT With no RCT, matching methods can be used to create comparison groups that look alike, controlling for confounding differences. Propensity score matching now widely applied, probability of participation estimated using observable variables.,

8
Specific Research Questions for Philadelphia Rapid Re-Housing Study Does Rapid Re-Housing improve housing stability for formerly homeless households by decreasing the risk of a return to homelessness? Does RRH help to improve household income? Was the HPRP RRH policy effective in decreasing the risk of homelessness?

11
PSM Analysis: Return to Homelessness Results Comparison Group # Households % Returned to Homelessness Rapid Re- Housing Group 1,169 households 13.6% Non- RRH Group 1,286 households 39.4% Total2,455 cases Odds ratio: The odds of returning to homelessness were 42% higher for households that did not receive RRH compared to households that did receive RRH

12
Washington State Evaluation – Robust matching model RRH and employment Washington State 2010 Evaluation - Rapid Re-Housing Impacts on Employment* *RRH clients were 1.25 times more likely to be employed, and, on average, earned $422 more annually than their counterparts who did not receive RRH.

13
RRH Promising Practice: King County RRH Pilot Goal – To move 350 homeless families in King County into rental housing by December 31, 2014 Assessment: Short-term financial assistance and temporary housing-focused supports, including employment and training services, RRH funding: $3.1 million over Funders and planning partners include King County DCHS, City of Seattle Human Services Department, United Way of King County, Building Changes and the Seattle and King County Housing Authorities. RRH partnerships: Employment Navigator program. The navigators will provide critical supports to assist in gaining employment. Families may continue working with the employment navigator after rapid re-housing assistance

16
RRH Promising Practice: Utah - The Road Home Goal – Exit family households out of shelter to stable housing as soon as possible Assessment: Of 659 families entered Salt Lake County shelter families moved out: 62% of all families move out with RRH 5% families moved into supportive housing, 33 % of families moved out of shelter with no financial assistance Reassessment: Progressive Engagement RRH funding: Utah uses state TANF $$ for first four months of RRH, then ESG and other RRH funding if household still needs RRH RRH partnerships: TANF, State Department of Workforce Services to increase employment income

17
Recommendations for the Hennepin County Family Shelter System 2013 Summary of Recommended Practices 1. Collaboration and communication are key to providing not only a positive environment for families experiencing homelessness, but also provide better outcomes for families. 2. Streamlining the movement for a family from the point in time in which they seek out shelter to the point that they are stably housed reduces inefficiency and better serves our community. 3. Using existing resources provides the largest area of opportunity to make immediate changes and see an immediate reduction in family shelter use. 4. Targeting services based on individualized needs of the family is a more efficient use of resources, and provides the best outcomes for families.

18
RRH appears to effectively decrease risk of a return to homelessness. Why? Maybe….RRH housing case management services access landlord partnerships, find new viable housing opportunities not previously on the radar for very poor households with housing barriers Maybe….time-limited housing stabilization assistance provides a self-determination boost, motivating efforts to do “whatever it takes” to stay out of homelessness Maybe… RRH works on the same fundamental principle as Housing First - -CLIENT CHOICE. By putting housing first in the service equation, clients access all three critical aspects of self-determination: autonomy, competence, and connectedness

21
Strong Performance Measurement Driver Diagram Mapping out a theory of change is key to monitoring RRH performance and continuous quality improvement. Three questions: 1) What is the aim of your RRH intervention?  What are you seeking to improve? 2) What are the necessary conditions for achieving RRH aim  What strategies will be necessary to achieve your RRH aim?  How will you know you are successful with each strategy? 3) What will it take to implement each primary strategy?